Interpretation on Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons in 2023
10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20230917-00126
- VernacularTitle:2023年欧洲心胸外科协会和美国胸外科医师协会《冠状动脉旁路移植术旁路血管选择专家共识》解读
- Author:
Xujun CHEN
1
;
Jian ZHANG
;
Weidong LI
;
Bo LIAN
;
Huiming GUO
Author Information
1. 华中科技大学同济医学院武汉市第一医院心外科，武汉 430022
- Keywords:
Coronary disease;
Coronary artery bypass;
Transplants;
Expert consensus
- From:
Chinese Journal of Surgery
2024;62(1):44-48
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Expert systematic review on the choice of conduits for coronary artery bypass grafting: endorsed by the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons published in 2023 made recommendations for the selection of bypass vessels. The left internal thoracic artery-anterior descending branch anastomosis represents the accepted gold standard. Radial artery could achieve a better long-term patency rate and a reduction in adverse cardiac events compared to the great saphenous vein. Radial artery graft using an open harvesting method should be chosen to graft the target vessel with low competitive coronary flow, with the use of vasodilators for the first year. There was no clear evidence of better patency for the right internal thoracic artery compared to the great saphenous vein. The bilateral internal thoracic artery had better long-term survival compared to great saphenous vein but may be associated with a higher risk of deep sternal wound infection and should be avoided in high-risk patients. The impact of skeletonization of the internal thoracic artery on graft patency and cardiovascular outcomes was unclear. Endoscopic vein harvest reduced the risk of leg wound complications and was associated with reduced long-term patency. The patency of the no-touch great saphenous vein was significantly better than that of conventional great saphenous vein. A significantly higher risk of complications at the harvesting site and no clear evidence of better long-term clinical outcomes were found in the no-touch great saphenous vein compared to the conventional. There was limited data on the use of right gastroepiploic artery and skeletonized harvesting, which should be used to bypass target vessels in patients with low competitive flow.
